You may not believe this, but I don't have anti-Americanism as pastime.
Yes I know Canadians often do have a vocal anti-USA attitude. Once I had a canadian neighbour who used to complain about the USA and their "imperialism" every other day.
As much as I wouldn't consider myself as specifically anti-American, I wouldn't call myself anti-Russian. However, I am also conscious that countries are in fact imperialist bullies, they are not moral players, and people are victimized and oppressed by self-righteous powers who cause perpetration of injustice through various brutal methods. Those powers also usually maintain a narrative of lies favourable to their own agenda.
This has not much to do with the particular state or country, doesn't depend on nationality, doesn't have to do with name of the country who commits the crimes.
Nonetheless, false narratives and self-righteousness is what outrages me. When I think at United Stetes, I associate's things Pinochet's golpe in Chile organized by Henry Kissinger, and I think about many young people of Italian descent who were thrown into the ocean. I think the US justice system is crap and I'm afraid it's a profoundly unjust society where 1% of population possesses 60% of richness, and in general I perceive American society as culturally and legally primitive, not the best place for me to live in. But being bullies on an international theotre is not a peculiarity of the USA. I am sure Italy (or similar countries lie France) did commit their crimes and swept them under idle narratives like any other power. Imperialism of bullies also is susually met by equally repugnant servility from their "victim" countries, which is even more outrageous to me. Yet I am not ready to accept that people are thown into the ocean and nobody brings justice to them, and I am not going to say "yes" to imperialism, false narratives and servility: it's not my nature.
So the question of anti-Americanism makes little sense to me. But the contempt of sovereignity, lack of understanding and indifference Americans have shown with respect to justice and point of view of foreign people, has objectively a long list of records.
You have a problem with acknowledging facts.
This is called a petitio-principii.
This is not an astonishing ability of guilters, but rather, it is a yardstick of the untruthfulness of the pro-Knox supporters. Do you remember? It was YOU who used to claimed that I asserted to have become convinced of Knox's guilt after looking at her photograph? This was YOUR straw man. You don't really remember? You went on possibly many months believing this story you made up yourself.
You used to say "Machiavelli believes Knox's guilt since he saw her photogralh". It's all made up by you.
On the other hand, the degree by which the pro-Knox were ready to cutt off slack, downplay and deny before the evidence that Knox was a liar, is telling of everything.
The fact that Knox's "friends" reunion is only made of whites is not something I am making up. It's a matter of fact. And that qualifies it - statistically - as a racial group. Simply the pro-Knox PR machine appears to be racially targeted. You won't be able to bring evidence that the non-white population has an equal representation among the pro-Knox supporters.
And where do you pick up this from, now? Tell me please, where did I write "the whole" City of Seattle?
You are making it up, again.
The truth is I never said that.
(or quote the line where I say "whole" etc., thanks).
Sorry, don't be senseless. That makes really no sense. Florence public prosecution office dos not have jurisdiction on Section 5 of Cassazione.
That would require a denounciation to the Rome prosecution office.
(your assertions about what is "lost" are again things you are making up yourself).
As always, you only guess and rationalize without evidence. This is nothing but dietrology. It is fallacious: you try to "deduce" things you don't know about reality out of alleged things about the poster or third person which you also have no evidence about.
You always played this game. Your nature is repelled by the idea of talking about something directly or honestly, without rebouncing through manipulation and insinuation about alleged words, actions or motivations of someone else you speculate about. It's like when you used to say "Nencini belives females have Y chromosomes", based on (among other things) your erroneous assumption that he would agree with Vecchiotti, something you derived from changing his words in another statement.
No. It was not a defamation charge. It was a calunnia charge.
And she is acquitted by now only on first instance (we don't know the grounds; it might even be only on points of law, because calunnia is a charge quite different from defamation).
I suppose very well. Mignini will win.
?!
(...)
Judge Hellmann said in an interview: "the case will remain unsolved".
Courts found Guede was not holding the murder weapon, the break in was staged, and Knox is definitively acquitted of perverting justice by falsely accusing an innocent.
Bruno/Marasca said Knox was there and heared Meredith's scream, emphasized there are multiple murderers, and pointed out no way the Knox's calunnia against Lumumba could be forced or involuntary and no way she could change something at ECHR. Also found that she washed her hands of Meredith's blood, that she did so while trying to erase evidence (if not while killing).
What Italians wrote include Chieffi which makes points of law that are definitive and valid. This is the state of facts in Italy.
My reading of what Hellmann writes, is that Guede could not hang around with Sollecito and Knox because they are "good fellows" while he is "different".
